I have seen dealers who mucked the cards. And I have seen dealers who did nothing. One time I pleaded the case successfully to the dealer to give the BB back his cards because they were the only cards in the muck.

But again this is different than the case at hand. In the above case we are talking about giving up one blind. And the player may have a reason to do it. He may not trust himself to play a hand like 83o.

In this OP though, a player went all-in, was called, clearly did not realize he was called (and we don't know if it was dealer error or not), and relinquished his cards thinking he has won.

This is clearly a procedural error.
This is absurd.

If Player B were to ask for a ruling, no Floor I have ever seen would rule the cards were dead.

But seriously what kind of jerk would ask for a ruling? Do you really want to win because your opponent doesn't know you are still in the hand?

I have seen this exact scenario happen within the past 2 weeks. Floor was called after someone mucked thinking there were no callers, and his hand was ruled dead. I was sitting there and witnessed it first hand. So yes there are all kinds of jerks on a poker table, it's not a tea party.

Both the dealer and the player are at fault here, but he shouldn't lose his stack. Most floor rules are that when players are all in each have to show their cards. If they never showed their cards, then the procedure wasn't followed and he shouldn't lose. And saying that he "folded" is flat out wrong. The guy should take a penalty but get his money back.

Well, that is not what happened here. The player thought he won and "mucked", the dealer didn't muck his cards, the dealer pushed the pot to someone else, the player objected, the dealer told him he had mucked, then, presumably to teach him a lesson or something, only then did he muck the cards and eliminate any chance for the floor to make a ruling contrary to what the dealer thought it should be.

This dealer could have preserved everything and called the floor over to rule, but instead to took an action that caused more harm and was irreversible. I'd cut him more slack if it was some muscle memory thing, but it wasn't. It was done after the fact, and with a comment that indicates he still thinks he was doing the right thing. He needs retraining.

No, this does not mean he needs to verify every fold/muck. But the world is not black and white. Unless this is the dealer's first day, he knows that this is an atypical situation which might require an atypical response.

In a cash game, no one has to show, even when all in. I don't know what ruleset you're talking about, but it doesn't sound like a common one.

He was responding to a post where you asserted that unmucked cards should be ruled dead. So it's not the exact scenario. You play in a hostile room that is definitely the exception.

everyone has made a mistake in their past. and everyone has paid for their mistakes. This is no different. You have to award the pot to the last live hand. It's very unfortunate to the guy who folded, but it is what it is.

This was not a poker mistake, it was a procedural mistake. There is no folding before the flop after your bet has been called. The action isn't on you.

And it is the dealer's responsibility to make it clear that his bet has been called. When Player A mucks it should be apparent to the dealer that Player A does not realize he has been called.

I am a big proponent of protecting your hand. I never give up my cards until a pot is being pushed to me. And that would have saved Player A here no doubt. But this dealer is a huge a**hole. And he doesn't know what he is doing. Here are the mistakes I think the dealer made on this hand:
1) Didn't make it clear that Player B called,
2) Didn't alert Player A that there was another player in the hand when player A mucked by asking if he wanted to muck,
3) Didn't call the Floor to get a ruling before irretrievably mucking Player A's cards
4) Pushes the pot before all losing hands are in the muck pile

^ yes the dealer could have made it clear that another player called and it's heads up. The dealer could have also stopped the player from folding, just like when UTG doesn't realize he's the BB. That is all true, but the end result is the player folded and the dealer, being the robot that he is, mucked the hand.

The responsibility comes back to the player. He is the final authority for his hand and he should have been following the action and notice someone called him. It was a careless mistake, but it's still on him. The player get's the error, not the pitcher. It's an E4.

If 100 dealers were in his spot, maybe 85 of them would have stopped him from folding, but that doesn't mean it's not the player's fault in the long run.

I'm not taking the dealer's side here at all, all I'm saying is we as players have to take final responsibility for our actions. We can't always rely on the dealer to rescue us in these situations. This is also why we hold our cards until the pot is pushed to us.

So the dealer didn't run the board out on an all-in and a call?

Sounds like dealer doesn't like player A and was just looking for an excuse to screw him over. Anytime you have an all in and a call, dealer should have run out the board, regardless of whether A surrendered his hand. So a strong dealer would have told A to hold on to his hand until he runs the board out, since the dealer would assume that A is not there just to donate money.

But still, it's the job of the dealer to run the game, and the responsibility of the players to make sure the dealer runs it right. Since the dealer technically didn't do anything wrong, except for omitting to run out the board before he shoved B the pot, the blame still lies on the player. It is always the responsibility of the player to hold on to his cards until the hand is over.

At 1/2, no one gives a ****.

in a big game, no one is going to have sympathy for the person who mucks their hand accidently. Plus, big game players constantly shoot angles at each other like that. They yell loud, cuss up a storm, and wait for years to run an angle like this. Mostly becuase someone has done the exact same thing to them many years before.

If the game was anything above 1/2 then I think the dealer handled it correctly. If the cards are still identifiable I can see an argument for allowing player A to retrieve them. I think A should lose his stack 99% of the time, though.

In situations where a player is not facing action, including showdown and examples like this, tossing your cards forward is not a fold. The dealer in question doesn't seem to understand this (or has more sinister motives), and apparently he's not alone.

If this dealer tried to explain to me that he thought Player A was folding voluntarily before having the board run out, I'd question both his training and his IQ.

Your concept of "most floor rules" appears to be something that you just made up.

Perhaps you missed the part about the dealer mucking the hand after Player 4 objected to the pot going to 9. Responsibility is always on a player to protect their hand (and he did did to stop the dealer) but what the dealer did in this case was very wrong. Dealer should have stopped at that point and called the floor for a ruling rather then making the problem worse.

We don't know if this was done at the same time he was questioning the dealer or if it was done well after he questioned him

The player should have instead said "Wait! Call the floor I want a ruling" and maybe he would have kept the hand out of the muck and called the floor.

When a player throws his hand in face down, it's telling the dealer he's folding. The dealers are not all bright enough to stop and think if he was folding by mistake or not. Like I said above, most dealers would not have mucked the hand.

lol at this because you quoted the exact portion of the OP that says exactly what happened.

4 questions, dealer responds and mucks. Dealer now knows there is a problem and compounds the problem by mucking the cards.

There are holes all over the field from where Playbig2000 has dug up the goalposts.

We use a 'forward motion with release' rule. But there is also common sense 'for the good of the game' in Robert's Rules as well.

Most of the time in a charity room the dealers are a little more forgiving and a warning would be given here and play would continue.

We are all human and perhaps there was some bias towards Player A by the dealer, we can't make that judgement. At 'worst' the dealer should have paused and let Player A assess the situation before pushing the pot or reaching for the cards.

An all-in muck PF? Pretty sure we have a player 'issue' here and not a player 'intent' ... that should be the starting factor for this event. GL

dealer didn't technically do anything wrong... but really this is an obvious misunderstanding. even the dealer would be surprised at the toss and should have said something.

Can someone clarify the procedure in a cash game: if there is an all-in and a call pre-flop (or any street before the river) is it actually possible for a player to concede the hand without the rest of the board being dealt out? I know in a tournament the board needs to be run out, but I honestly don't know the rule for cash games and I've never witnessed a player muck their hand pre-flop when their shove was called.

Yes you can concede, and in some rooms the dealers don't have to run the board out once a single hand remains.

It's not always that easy.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=678

Never play at Derby Lane. Easy game.